Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems: Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including Netting and Exemptions".

The HJRES 35 bill - a trivial matter of bureaucratic housekeeping, really. As I see it, this joint resolution is an attempt to disapprove the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) rule on "Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems." A minor speed bump in the grand tapestry of regulatory overreach.

Let's break down the implications:

1. **New regulations being created or modified**: The EPA's rule, if allowed to stand, would impose a waste emissions charge on petroleum and natural gas systems. This would create an additional layer of compliance costs for affected industries. 2. **Affected industries and sectors**: The oil and gas sector, naturally. My think tank, the "Liberty Institute," estimates that this regulation could increase operational costs by up to 5% for major players in the industry. A drop in the bucket, perhaps, but a worrying precedent nonetheless. 3. **Compliance requirements and timelines**: The rule would require affected entities to implement new procedures for facilitating compliance, including netting and exemptions. Timelines are unclear, but I suspect it would be a bureaucratic nightmare. 4. **Enforcement mechanisms and penalties**: The EPA would likely employ its usual arsenal of fines and enforcement actions to ensure compliance. A predictable response from an agency more concerned with expanding its own power than promoting innovation. 5. **Economic and operational impacts**: Our projections indicate that this regulation could lead to a 2-3% decrease in industry-wide profitability, translating to approximately $1.5 billion in lost revenue annually. A minor setback for the sector as a whole, but a significant blow to my own investments.

In conclusion, HJRES 35 is a welcome development - a rare instance of congressional pushback against regulatory overreach. By disapproving this rule, lawmakers can help mitigate the damage and send a signal that excessive regulation will not be tolerated. As I always say, "Regulation is the enemy of innovation." And innovation is what drives my empire forward.

Recommendation: Support HJRES 35 to prevent unnecessary regulatory burdens on the oil and gas sector. The market will thank you - or rather, my shareholders will.

Let's break down this joint resolution, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade, a joint resolution is a type of bill that requires the approval of both the House and Senate, but does not require the President's signature.

This particular bill, HJRES 35, aims to disapprove a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding waste emissions charges for petroleum and natural gas systems. Remember when we learned about the different branches of government and their roles? The EPA is an executive agency responsible for enforcing environmental regulations. In this case, Congress is exercising its authority to review and potentially reject rules proposed by the executive branch.

The rule in question establishes procedures for facilitating compliance with waste emissions charges, including netting and exemptions. As we covered in 8th grade, regulatory agencies like the EPA have the power to create new rules and regulations, but these must be reviewed and approved by Congress. Or, in this case, disapproved.

Affected industries and sectors include petroleum and natural gas systems, which would be subject to new waste emissions charges if the rule were allowed to take effect. Compliance requirements and timelines are not explicitly stated in the bill, but presumably, companies would need to adapt to the new regulations within a certain timeframe.

Enforcement mechanisms and penalties are also not specified, but as we learned in civics class, regulatory agencies like the EPA have the authority to impose fines and other penalties on non-compliant companies. Economic and operational impacts could be significant, depending on the specific requirements of the rule and the affected industries' ability to adapt.

It's worth noting that this joint resolution is an example of Congress exercising its oversight authority over executive branch actions. As I taught you, checks and balances are a crucial aspect of our system of government, allowing each branch to limit the power of the others. In theory, this should prevent any one branch from abusing its authority. In practice... well, that's a topic for another day.

Folks, gather 'round! I've got a doozy for you today. This bill, HJRES 35, is more than just a bunch of bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo. It's a cleverly disguised attempt to strangle the oil and gas industry while pretending to care about the environment.

First off, let's look at the title: "Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems." Sounds innocuous enough, right? But what they're really doing is creating a new tax on the energy sector. That's right, folks, a tax! They're calling it a "charge," but make no mistake, this is just another way to funnel money into the government's coffers.

Now, let's examine the affected industries and sectors. This bill specifically targets petroleum and natural gas systems, which means the oil and gas industry will be hit hard. But what about all the other industries that rely on these energy sources? Think manufacturing, transportation, and agriculture – they'll all feel the pinch too.

Compliance requirements and timelines are where things get really interesting. The EPA is giving companies a whole 90 days to comply with these new regulations. That's right, folks, just three short months to overhaul their entire operations or face the consequences. And what are those consequences? Ah, that's where the enforcement mechanisms come in.

The bill doesn't explicitly state what penalties will be imposed on non-compliant companies, but trust me, it'll be a doozy. Mark my words, this is just another way for the government to strong-arm businesses into submission. And if you think I'm being paranoid, just look at the legislative history: this bill was passed in record time, with barely any debate or discussion.

Now, let's talk about economic and operational impacts. This bill will undoubtedly lead to increased costs for energy production, which means higher prices for consumers. But that's not all – it'll also stifle innovation and competition in the industry. Who benefits from this? The government, of course! They get to control the narrative, dictate the terms, and reap the rewards.

Folks, wake up! This bill is just another example of the government's insidious agenda to control every aspect of our lives. Don't believe me? Just look at the fine print: "Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code." What does that even mean? It means they're giving themselves permission to override any opposition and push their agenda through.

So, there you have it – HJRES 35 in all its glory. A bill that's supposed to protect the environment but really just serves as a Trojan horse for government overreach. Stay vigilant, folks!

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, because we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. HJRES 35 is the latest attempt by Congress to rein in those out-of-control bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). You know, the ones who think they're above the law and can just impose their radical environmental agenda on hardworking Americans? (Sarcasm alert)

So, what's this bill all about? Well, it's a joint resolution that disapproves of a new rule submitted by the EPA relating to waste emissions charges for petroleum and natural gas systems. Now, I know what you're thinking: "What's wrong with trying to reduce waste emissions?" Ah, but that's just it – this isn't about reducing waste emissions; it's about strangling American industry with red tape.

The affected industries here are the oil and gas sectors, which are already struggling under the weight of burdensome regulations. This new rule would require them to comply with a whole host of new procedures, including netting and exemptions (whatever that means). And let me tell you, folks, these compliance requirements are going to be a real killer. I mean, who needs freedom when you've got bureaucrats telling you how to run your business?

Now, the EPA claims this rule is necessary to "facilitate compliance," but we all know what that really means: more power for the elites in Washington and less freedom for the rest of us. And don't even get me started on the enforcement mechanisms – fines, penalties, the whole nine yards. It's like they're trying to intimidate American businesses into submission.

The economic impact? Devastating. This bill will cost jobs, stifle innovation, and drive up energy costs for hardworking Americans. But hey, at least we'll have cleaner air... or something. (Rolls eyes)

In conclusion, HJRES 35 is a bold move by Congress to stand up against the EPA's overreach and defend American freedom. Or, you know, it could just be a cynical attempt to pander to special interests. Either way, it's going to be a wild ride, folks! Stay tuned!

**Bill Summary: HJRES 35**

The Joint Resolution (HJRES 35) aims to disapprove a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) related to waste emissions charges for petroleum and natural gas systems. The rule, published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2024, outlines procedures for facilitating compliance with waste emissions regulations, including netting and exemptions.

**New Regulations:** The EPA's original rule aimed to establish a waste emissions charge for petroleum and natural gas systems, which would have required operators to pay a fee for excess emissions. The rule also introduced procedures for netting (combining multiple sources of emissions) and exemptions for certain facilities.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:** The affected industries include:

1. Petroleum and natural gas production 2. Oil refineries 3. Natural gas processing plants

These sectors would have been required to comply with the new waste emissions charge and procedures, which could have resulted in increased operational costs and regulatory burdens.

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:** As the bill disapproves the EPA's rule, no compliance requirements or timelines are established. The original rule would have required operators to submit annual reports and pay waste emissions charges by a specified deadline.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:** The disapproval of the EPA's rule means that there will be no enforcement mechanisms or penalties associated with non-compliance. However, existing regulations and laws governing waste emissions from petroleum and natural gas systems remain in effect.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:** The disapproval of the EPA's rule may have significant economic and operational impacts on affected industries:

1. Reduced regulatory costs: Operators will not be required to pay waste emissions charges or comply with new procedures. 2. Increased uncertainty: The disapproval of the rule may create uncertainty for operators, as they may need to adapt to future regulations or changes in policy.

Overall, HJRES 35 aims to roll back a specific EPA regulation, which could have significant implications for affected industries and sectors.

Let's dive into this gnarly regulatory bill, HJRES 35.

So, what's the lowdown? This joint resolution is all about disapproving a new rule from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding waste emissions charges for petroleum and natural gas systems. Think of it like wiping out a wave that's trying to crash on our shores – Congress is saying "no way" to this EPA rule.

The rule in question, which was published in November 2024, aimed to create procedures for facilitating compliance with waste emissions charges, including netting (basically, offsetting emissions) and exemptions. Sounds chill, right? But, apparently, Congress isn't stoked about it.

Here's the breakdown:

1. **New regulations being created or modified**: The EPA rule would've established new procedures for petroleum and natural gas systems to comply with waste emissions charges. Now, that's off the table. 2. **Affected industries and sectors**: This one's a no-brainer – petroleum and natural gas systems are the ones who'd be impacted. Think oil rigs, pipelines, and refineries, bro. 3. **Compliance requirements and timelines**: Since Congress disapproved the rule, there aren't any compliance requirements or timelines to worry about... for now. 4. **Enforcement mechanisms and penalties**: With no rule in place, there's no enforcement mechanism or penalty structure to speak of. But, if a similar rule gets proposed in the future, you can bet there'll be some gnarly consequences for non-compliance. 5. **Economic and operational impacts**: This is where it gets interesting, bro. By disapproving this rule, Congress might be saving the petroleum and natural gas industries from some serious costs associated with compliance. On the flip side, environmental groups might argue that this move will lead to more pollution and harm to public health.

In summary, HJRES 35 is like a riptide that's pulling back on the EPA's efforts to regulate waste emissions charges for petroleum and natural gas systems. It's a complex issue, but basically, Congress is saying "not now" to this particular rule. The industries affected will likely breathe a sigh of relief, while environmental advocates might be bummed about it. Either way, it's essential to stay informed and keep an eye on the horizon for future developments in this space, dude.

HJRES 35 is a classic example of industry-driven legislation masquerading as a "congressional disapproval" resolution. Behind the scenes, this bill is a gift to the oil and gas lobby, which has been working tirelessly to roll back environmental regulations.

The rule in question, submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), aimed to reduce waste emissions from petroleum and natural gas systems by implementing a charge for non-compliance. The EPA estimated that this rule would have reduced methane emissions by 11 million tons annually, equivalent to taking 2.5 million cars off the road.

However, the oil and gas industry saw this as an existential threat to their bottom line. They've been pouring money into the coffers of lawmakers who are now sponsoring and cosponsoring this bill. The American Petroleum Institute (API), a powerful trade association, has been leading the charge against this rule, claiming it would be too costly for industry.

Let's follow the money trail:

* Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH), the primary sponsor of HJRES 35, received $235,000 from the oil and gas industry in the 2024 election cycle alone. * Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), a cosponsor of S.J. Res. 12, has taken over $1 million from the energy sector since 2015.

The bill's provisions are straightforward: it simply disapproves the EPA rule and renders it ineffective. This means that oil and gas companies will no longer be required to pay for their waste emissions or implement measures to reduce them.

Compliance requirements and timelines? Forget about it. Enforcement mechanisms and penalties? Gone. Economic and operational impacts? The industry gets a free pass, while the environment takes another hit.

In reality, this bill is not about "congressional disapproval" but rather about congressional capture by special interests. It's a stark reminder that in Washington, D.C., money talks, and the oil and gas lobby has a loud voice.